welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The Revolution!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darqcyde wrote:
Willem wrote:
So you know how it feels to be discriminated. Now imagine also being a woman.

Couldn't even begin and I'm not gonna try. Also, you're not gonna change my mind on this. It's not that I don't understand you or the issue, I disagree with your solution. To me, making a word taboo and/or avoiding it's usage only gives it more power and weight. You can't make words disappear as was said, so changing how they are used and associated becomes the only option.

But that's meaningless if you don't change the underlying issues (patriarchy) first. Maybe you'll actually do it, maybe you'll actually change the meaning of the word 'whore' by some sort of gargantuan effort and you'll be able to enjoy the word all day long. But another word will just take its place. The sentiment you expressed in your offending post will still be offensive, regardless of how offensive the word 'whore' itself is. You'll have solved nothing, you'll still be part of the problem.

And again:

Dogen wrote:
Just in case you were thinking this, you can't "take back the word." Men can't take back a word used by men to denigrate women, just like white people can't take back nigger and make it a happy, friendly word. It was already a male word, and when used by men it carries the negative and shameful context. Period.


The only way those words might end up becoming inoffensive, is if the underlying conflicts are resolved.

And fyi, my 'avoid using these words in that way' solution isn't just an effort to ban words or something. It's an effort to ban the sentiment behind those words and an effort to attack patriarchy itself.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yorick



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12101
Location: In the undersnow

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darqcyde wrote:
Yorick wrote:
ShadowCell wrote:
what the hell is the relevant distinction between "whore" and "slut"

one gets paid?

Whore has it's roots as a gender neutral word. Slut has ALWAYS been used as a pejoratively against women.

which isn't relevant, as best I can tell ...
_________________
Currently experiencing: not summer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Atrophy Annie



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1690
Location: Your Mom

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just an FYI, Darq, you calling men whores in no way, shape, or form makes me feel less contempt for you than when I saw you call her a whore. But please, go on and fix the word for us and take away the negativity by throwing the word around. I super appreciate it.

Rolling Eyes

Now, maybe when you exclusively call men whores, maybe I can get behind your crusade (not likely), but as long as you continue to use the word against women, you're a fucking asshole. Because I see you call a woman a whore and I certainly didn't go, "Well, gosh, as long as he says that to dudes, it's totally okay." Nothing more fucking obnoxious than some man saying "HURR HURR DON'T GET UPSET IT DOESN'T MEEEEAN ANYTHING." Because let me tell you, I frequent several forums and the amount of times I've seen a word like that used against a guy versus a woman makes the notion that you can take away the negativity by not making it gender exclusive (which, let's face it, in its most common usage it pretty much is, no matter the textbook definition) absolutely ridiculous. You're not helping the greater cause by calling men whores. You just look like some idiotic child who just wants some excuse to call a woman a whore.

I'm hoping you won't have the audacity to try to explain to me, a woman, that you mean no harm and what you're doing is okay but I won't hold my breath.

_________________
Way to kill the conversation, Patty.- Trevor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
Good to know Guest still makes his posts by laying tiny, little turds on the appropriate keys. Let's see.


Yes, as if my "little turds" wasn't a reaction to the absolute diarrhea you spewed all over yours. (Hey, if you're content on talking shit then so am I.)

Quote:
Quote:
It's comparable to saying you're well off "compared to people in worse places." Which makes everything better, doesn't it? And puts everything into perspective, oh, and you really shouldn't complain because there is always someone worse off than you. Because I imagine people who are worse off than others wants you to feel just as bad as they do.


This is actually the exact opposite of what I meant.


Of course it was. However we can't expect everyone to be mindreaders, now can we, so we react to what people say and not what they meant to say.

Quote:
No foolin', I don't like that relativism either. My point wasn't "you're being discriminated, but women have it worse". My point was: "You're being discriminated and that's a bad thing. That's why you should definitely know that discriminating someone else is bad as well, because of your own experiences with discrimination." Both are bad. Maybe I should've pulled that 'also' from that sentence, because it clouds the message slightly, but there we go. No confusion? 'kay.


The statement "so you know how it feels to be discriminated [against], now imagine (also) being a woman" does imply women have it worse. That what they have experienced is considerably less to that of a woman. So why not just say discrimination is bad, period? No need for the circular diatribe if that is what you're going to come back to in the end, is it?

Quote:
Quote:
So maybe he should've used a better word, but give it a fucking rest with your moral posturing, won't you? As if you've never used a word that's "inappropriate" in other contexts. You're not exactly the moral guide for that sort of thing, are you, Willem?


If you're calling someone out on a fallacy (wrongfully, in this case, but whatever), it's best not to follow it up with one of your own. I guess it doesn't matter if my record isn't clean, I recognise that I've said and did stupid things in the past and I recognise that I have to avoid falling into those traps again. And it's not moral posturing when I'm just saying 'hey, stop being part of the problem okay'


Pointing out to you that you're not the absolute moral guide on the use of words "inappropriate" in other contexts, does not at the same time implicate me for commiting an equal feat. I'm the one admitting that I'm not a beacon of light, so why should I be scrutinized for the same offence? Whatever. As a matter of fact you are posturing. If the word indeed is so inflammatory, then should it not be avoided in other contexts as well? If people are content at using said word in other situations where the accusation of misogyny is obviously not in question -- that is to say if "you can't take it back" (which I agree with) -- then why use it at all?

Quote:
Quote:
"Whore", by the way, as well you should know studying history, has been used for both genders since its conception. It's not used to just discriminate against women, that's a fucking falsehood -- and you know it

I know this is complicated. I know. But listen up: Whore can be used for both genders. That's true. Very true.


Is there an echo?

Quote:
But I looked it up in three online dictionaries. Dictionary.com, Cambridge online dictionary and mirriam-websters. Only the last one didn't specifically define it as a woman only-word. But let's ignore that.


Slithering.

Quote:
Dictionaries aren't infallible and it doesn't matter what they say. Why? Because while the word can be used for both genders, it's still mainly used - not intentionally, mind - to discriminate against women. That little thing we talked about, remember? Context?


Yes, while we're on the subject, do you have any evidence that 'whore' is a word used mainly for women?

Quote:
But that's not the word's fault. If he called that woman a 'cunt' (like in the other thread), it would be equally bad. It's not about the word itself. It can be used without being inherently misogynistic (when describing a prostitute, although only when talking about them in neutral terms and even then it's up for dispute. Prostitute is preferable anyway, but I digress.), but that's not how it was used here. The sentiment he was trying to get across was inherently misogynistic. Let's quote him here:

Quote:
Sooo the whole world gets to know she's a cheating whore? i mean, if i taking action i wouldn't be showing it off so much considering the story.

...

A whore is someone who sleeps with others for personal gain,


Darq, you can chime in on this one as well. Now, keep in mind that this is all based on a hoax, but Darq didn't know that at the time. He starts by ignoring the whole 'unwanted tattoo' part of the story and hones in on the woman cheating on her boyfriend. He decides that he needs to speak out and instead of expressing his sentiment that she shouldn't be publicly complaining about her boyfriends actions (this sentiment is also misogynistic) by saying 'so the whole world gets to know she cheated on him', he calls her a whore. Which he then later defines as someone who sleeps with others for personal gain. But I'm not really seeing this in this story, so Darq, can you explain? What did she do to qualify the 'whore'-tag?


Well if we're going to take the meaning of the word into context here, Willem, and context is everything, it doesn't even make sense to call her a 'whore.' She wasn't sleeping around for personal gain, she wasn't sleeping around for money. Rather the accurately misogynistic word here would be 'slut', which Darq didn't use. Um. Unless it was 'slut' he intended to use in the first place. Hmm.

Quote:
So in your post you argued against the opposite of what I said (aggressively agreeing with me, basically) ...


Probably because of how it were phrased.

Quote:
threw in a fallacy


...which would be?

Quote:
and finished off by nitpicking (aggressively) while ignoring the point of the whole discussion. Are you up to speed after this post or do you still feel the need to disagree?


I didn't nitpick, Willem. You meant one thing, but said another. It's not my fault of how you word your thoughts. I only react to what you write. I can't read minds. Oh, and aggressively? Really, Willem?
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dogen wrote:
Naive realism it is, then. Now that Guest is here at least he won't feel alone.


I beg your pardon?
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Atrophy Annie



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1690
Location: Your Mom

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
Yes, while we're on the subject, do you have any evidence that 'whore' is a word used mainly for women?


Uhhhhh, experience? Maybe it's not where you're from, but here it sure as hell is. And think of this, the extremely few times I've heard a man referred to as a whore, they were actually referred to as a "manwhore". That should tell you something right there.
_________________
Way to kill the conversation, Patty.- Trevor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Um, yes, maybe I should have said. Evidence that 'whore' (and derivations of it) is used mainly for women globally. Because I'm pretty sure that the suburbs in, for example, Stockholm, use the word 'whore' (derogatively, of course) to describe both men and women. In Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, this is also the case. It's used perjoratively in all cases, but mainly for women? I need to be shown some conclusive proof on that.
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The statement "so you know how it feels to be discriminated [against], now imagine (also) being a woman" does imply women have it worse. That what they have experienced is considerably less to that of a woman. So why not just say discrimination is bad, period? No need for the circular diatribe if that is what you're going to come back to in the end, is it?

It either suggests seeing the similarities between the discrimination aimed at him and the type of discrimination women face or it says that black-white-hispanic women have it worse than black-white-hispanic men because aside from the racial discrimination, they also get a portion of gender discrimination. Both are correct statements, but I meant the first one. Discrimination is bad.

Quote:
Pointing out to you that you're not the absolute moral guide on the use of words "inappropriate" in other contexts, does not at the same time implicate me for commiting an equal feat. I'm the one admitting that I'm not a beacon of light, so why should I be scrutinized for the same offence? Whatever.

My point was that I don't have to be a pillar of society to talk about this - and neither should you. It's one of those tu quoque things, I think. I said you were using it on me and now you're saying that in doing so I'm using it on you... or something. Whatever, fallacies are stupid. Forget it.

Quote:
If the word indeed is so inflammatory, then should it not be avoided in other contexts as well? If people are content at using said word in other situations where the accusation of misogyny is obviously not in question -- that is to say if "you can't take it back" (which I agree with) -- then why use it at all?

Well obviously, never using it would be ideal.

Quote:
Yes, while we're on the subject, do you have any evidence that 'whore' is a word used mainly for women?



Before I answer that, are you asking this question because you're trying to be as difficult and pedantic as possible or do you actually think 'whore' isn't mainly used for women?

Quote:
Well if we're going to take the meaning of the word into context here, Willem, and context is everything, it doesn't even make sense to call her a 'whore.' She wasn't sleeping around for personal gain, she wasn't sleeping around for money. Rather the accurately misogynistic word here would be 'slut', which Darq didn't use. Um. Unless it was 'slut' he intended to use in the first place. Hmm.

Hence the confusion. He used the term even though it didn't even make sense in this context, but in the context of misogyny it fits right in.

Or is your point that because it doesn't make sense to call her a whore, it's not misogynistic? Because you know, that'd be stupid.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
Um, yes, maybe I should have said. Evidence that 'whore' (and derivations of it) is used mainly for women globally. Because I'm pretty sure that the suburbs in, for example, Stockholm, use the word 'whore' (derogatively, of course) to describe both men and women. In Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, this is also the case. It's used perjoratively in all cases, but mainly for women? I need to be shown some conclusive proof on that.

We're talking about an English word. Thus we're talking about the English language, not about Swedish or Portuguese. What the hell, man.

edit: we're also specifically talking about America because Darq's an American. What. The. Hell.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yorick



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12101
Location: In the undersnow

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
Um, yes, maybe I should have said. Evidence that 'whore' (and derivations of it) is used mainly for women globally. Because I'm pretty sure that the suburbs in, for example, Stockholm, use the word 'whore' (derogatively, of course) to describe both men and women. In Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, this is also the case. It's used perjoratively in all cases, but mainly for women? I need to be shown some conclusive proof on that.


stop being such a whore, you slut.
_________________
Currently experiencing: not summer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
Guest wrote:
Um, yes, maybe I should have said. Evidence that 'whore' (and derivations of it) is used mainly for women globally. Because I'm pretty sure that the suburbs in, for example, Stockholm, use the word 'whore' (derogatively, of course) to describe both men and women. In Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, this is also the case. It's used perjoratively in all cases, but mainly for women? I need to be shown some conclusive proof on that.

We're talking about an English word. Thus we're talking about the English language, not about Swedish or Portuguese. What the hell, man.

edit: we're also specifically talking about America because Darq's an American. What. The. Hell.


Were we? I thought we were talking about the negative connotation of the word 'whore'. We were not talking about the negative connotation of the word 'whore' in the States, or in Great Britain, or in Australia, or any other English speaking country. Which Darq, by the way, made clear when he linked to the etymology of the word. But if we're going to be awfully specific, then I suppose I may concede.

Not that there's any conclusive proof that 'whore' (in English) is used mainly for women either.
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest wrote:
Were we? I thought we were talking about the negative connotation of the word 'whore'. We were not talking about the negative connotation of the word 'whore' in the States, or in Great Britain, or in Australia, or any other English speaking country. Which Darq, by the way, made clear when he linked to the etymology of the word. But if we're going to be awfully specific, then I suppose I may concede.

Not that there's any conclusive proof that 'whore' (in English) is used mainly for women either.

What the hell. The fucking hell. So we're supposed to be talking about every translation of the word as well? Include every fucking specific cultural connotation and every type of translation as well? Every cultural context? I don't even know what's wrong with you if that was your first thought.

And I guess I'm SORRY that there haven't been studies into the usage of the word 'whore' that I can throw at you because obviously you're not going to buy people talking about experience and you're not going to pull your head out of your ass long enough to notice it yourself so I guess welp!
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Atrophy Annie



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1690
Location: Your Mom

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Except we were really talking about Omar's usage of it and Omar is American. So it doesn't really matter how it's used in other places, it's not even the point.
_________________
Way to kill the conversation, Patty.- Trevor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Guest



Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 2178

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
Guest wrote:
Were we? I thought we were talking about the negative connotation of the word 'whore'. We were not talking about the negative connotation of the word 'whore' in the States, or in Great Britain, or in Australia, or any other English speaking country. Which Darq, by the way, made clear when he linked to the etymology of the word. But if we're going to be awfully specific, then I suppose I may concede.

Not that there's any conclusive proof that 'whore' (in English) is used mainly for women either.

What the hell. The fucking hell. So we're supposed to be talking about every translation of the word as well? Include every fucking specific cultural connotation and every type of translation as well? Every cultural context? I don't even know what's wrong with you if that was your first thought.


Back to the ad homs, I see. No, 'whore' has pretty much retained its connotation across the globe. Its meaning. If we're going to discuss connotation, though, then cultural context may be an important part -- considering its use regarding men and women in the States obviously differs from its use elsewhere. Anyway, the issue was whether it was used to describe both men and women, which you're convinced is usually the latter.

Quote:
And I guess I'm SORRY that there haven't been studies into the usage of the word 'whore' that I can throw at you because obviously you're not going to buy people talking about experience and you're not going to pull your head out of your ass long enough to notice it yourself so I guess welp!


So wishing for more conclusive proof that women are called whores more often than men implies that I have my head stuck up my arse? Geez. Is your view on history just as skewed, I wonder?
_________________
"Apparently so. But suppose you throw a coin enough times, suppose one day. . . it lands on its edge."
--Amy Hennig, Soul Reaver 2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10806
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, Darq pulled out the dictionary because there was no way to argue the social context that the word embodies. Historical usage != current context. For instance, anchor baby may have some historical meaning that is non-offensive or equal opportunity offensive, but that's irrelevant to its use now.

The argument over the definition is a red herring at best. Yes, we're talking about the US, because as has been repeated over and over and over, we're discussing the word within a social context and the pretexts and connotations that go along with it. Since Darq is American, it seems obvious we'd be discussing his context, since he used the word. Stop me if this is making too much sense.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 6 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group